As far as the Wilkerson story goes, drop it. He caused the wreck by pulling in front of the SUV. Fenske only makes herself look stupid by mentioning stuff like following distance, and by reiterating that you're allowed to make U-turns at that location.

Wilkerson's fleeing the scene of a deadly accident wasn't just a felony and a pathetic, low-down thing to do, it was an indication of his guilt. When was the last time someone hit your car, causing damage, and you just floored it?
Steven White, Glendale

Steven White, are you listening?: Why is Andrew Thomas' office persisting in throwing the book at Bryant Wilkerson when it's clear that the drunk rich girl is the one who caused the accident?!

Could it be that Thomas needs the support of Laura Varker's family in his re-election bid? No chance any black people would ever vote for him anyway, so why not sell Wilkerson down the river, right? Keeps the rich crackers in this county happy.

At least the Yavapai County prosecutor's office is recommending that Varker be charged with something. Unlike Thomas' evil Republican drones. But she gets five misdemeanors, and the sober guy goes to prison 21 years?

Charge him with leaving the scene of an accident, which he shouldn't have done. And I'm not saying Varker should go to jail for 21 years either. But why can't Thomas' office be reasonable in sentencing both offenders?
Jane Williams, Phoenix

No common sense among prosecutors: Thanks to Sarah Fenske for exposing this travesty of justice. Once again, there is no common sense among the prosecutors who care only about a conviction, because they don't pick up the tab for the expenses involved — taxpayers do.

Our jails and prisons are overburdened. This man's life has been deeply affected. Keep on informing the public about the overzealous prosecution. Prosecutors no longer understand that "reasonable doubt" means "presumption of innocence."

What happens when someone abuses victim's rights laws? What are the penalties? The public has a right to know. They pay legal fees and all the costs. Sounds like the winner is the one who claims victim's rights first.
Name withheld by request

Why, oh, why?: Is there no justice in this nation anymore? If that had been me, I would have been behind bars so fast your head would spin. But no, one driver is black, one has rich parents. There is no justice.

Felicia Edwards' family members have suffered this past year trying to come to terms with her death. They've been waiting for justice, waiting and learning that there will probably be none.

Why? That's the question. We don't ask God why she was taken, just why there is no justice for her. Why is Laura Varker still running free? Why, I ask you?
Name withheld by request


Rethink your compassion: You had me agreeing with you until you began the pity party for the actual drunk drivers ("One Drink Wonder," Sarah Fenske, March 20). Boo-hoo.

My daughter, the designated driver, was the only person who had not been drinking in two vehicles when a drunk driver crossed the interstate median in Pueblo, Colorado, in 1994, traveled 1,000 meters and struck her head-on. She was the only one who died.

The other driver went to prison for six years, but nothing changes the fact that she is dead. I have an 18-year-old grandson who does not remember his mother. I miss her every day.

Save your compassion for miscarriages of justice — not for drunk drivers who haven't killed anyone. Yet.
Thomas Fife, via the Internet

A man who knows history: All the pure idiots defending the rat who called the cops and the insane cops themselves should be ashamed of yourselves.

You know nothing about DUI law, driving or the history of the country that gave you life. You all remind me of how the Nazis were able to rise to power in Germany.

You disgust me with your subservience, your licking of the boots of your masters. When they come for you (and if this state of affairs continues, they will) don't come crying to the rest of us.
Bill Mathis, via the Internet


Regrets? There are a few: There are many, many women who regret having had children. Like Sarah Fenske's mom ("Other Nature," May 8), they didn't realize they didn't have to get married and produce a family.

Some are bitter because they believe they played by the rules and got stuck with a husband and children who haven't lived up to their end of the bargain by providing grateful appreciation. Some because they gave up their plans of going to nursing school or opening their own greenhouse or whatever in order to do something they had been trained to believe was more important and more noble.

Some are just plain tired and depressed. They can be very resentful of women who chose not to marry and have children and whom they believe are all too carefree and disrespectful of the mom's conforming to the societal model.

It's sad and it's ugly, but it's an egg that can't be put back in the shell. No pun intended.
Gila Salado, Phoenix

« Previous Page
My Voice Nation Help

"Pretty boy posers"??!!! Look, I'll give it to you, Digital Summer is a good looking band, but if you've ever met them or knew anything about them you would know there's nothing "poser" about em! They're insanely talented and the hardest (almost too much so) working band I've ever even heard of! My advice to the other PHX bands out there....Pay attention to these guys...ya might just learn something.

Dove Shientag-Betts
Dove Shientag-Betts

Each year, thousands of animals die in Procter & Gamble laboratories -- the victims of painful, archaic and entirely unnecessary product tests. Caustic chemicals are forced into the eyes of rabbits and applied to animals' shaved and raw skin.

Laboratory workers place the animals in restraining devices so they cannot struggle while the workers apply the chemicals, which burn into the animals' eyes and skin. P&G "scientists" do not sedate the animals or give them pain killers.

Animals sometimes break their necks or backs attempting to escape the pain. Those that survive are used in yet additional painful tests ... until they are finally killed. The victims include rabbits, guinea pigs, hamsters, ferrets and other animals.

P&G refuses to stop testing its products on animals, despite the fact that these tests are not required by any law, and despite the fact that more reliable and humane alternatives do exist.

Procter & Gamble spends millions of dollars to package itself as a responsible, caring company, and claims to be a leader in the development of alternatives to the use of animals in product testing.

But P&G refuses to put its money where its mouth is. In 2004 alone, P&G spent $3 billion on advertising. This stands in stark contrast to the $64 million that P&G claims to have spent on developing alternatives over a 14-year period!

Despite its repeated P.R. claims about being in the forefront of developing alternatives and reducing product testing on animals, P&G's priorities seem clear: in less than 5 days, P&G spends more on advertising than it claims to have spent in 14 years on alternatives to painful and lethal animal tests.

The fact is, P&G says one thing and does another. If they truly shared our goal of eliminating animal cruelty, P&G would not have lobbied to defeat a bill before the California legislature that would have banned the infamous Draize eye-irritancy test.

In reality, P&G relies on these archaic tests strictly for its own protection from liability lawsuits. The truth is that P&G could stop animal testing today without hindering anyone's safety. Until it stops its animal cruelty, the letters P&G will stand for nothing but Pain & Greed!

Dove Betts

Phoenix Concert Tickets